Tag: dishonest employees

When trying to obtain the truth from a dishonest employee or other interview, we typically see five types of lies. Here they are.

This International Association of Interviewers interview and interrogation training tip provided by Wicklander-Zulawski, has Dave Thompson, CFI discussing the importance of rationalizing in the third person. When we rationalize with the subject, what we’re doing is we’re allowing them to save face while we’re showing understanding.

This International Association of Interviewers interview and interrogation training tip provided by Wicklander-Zulawski, has Dave Thompson, CFI, discussing the importance of withholding key evidence during an interview or interrogation. The term "withholding" really means keeping the information within the investigative resources. By not releasing that information to your subject, it gives you several advantages in the conversation.

For those charged with protecting company assets, a couple of recent news items raised red flags about dishonest insiders. Multiple studies underscore the risk from dishonest insiders and found that an important security tactic—the “two-person rule”—isn’t always enough. The research also provide insights into how employees rationalize dishonest behavior.

The great thing about the enticement question is that we can use it regardless of whether we have any evidence. The wording of the question thus becomes very important.

A common question that comes up in training seminars is: "How the heck do we get that written statement?"

With each topic that you introduce, there might be a little bit of resistance. What do we need to do to decrease resistance? Build more credibility, show understanding, and eventually lead to another assumptive question.

The participatory approach is specifically used when there’s circumstantial evidence or that there’s a possibility that your subject might have an excuse, an explanation, so some type of alibi that may or may not be true.

It's not uncommon for investigators to see the end goal of an investigation as the interview with the accused subject or involved subject.

The Wicklander-Zulawski (WZ) method is a non-confrontational interview that allows the interviewer to build credibility through a brief introductory statement—and then show understanding through rationalizing.